John Ivison: Financial transparency bill may usher in a Native Spring

No wonder so many native chiefs and councils are resisting the government’s bill aimed at increasing financial transparency for First Nations — the cold light of public scrutiny on their bulging pay packets will be enough to provoke pitchfork rebellions on many reserves.

The bill, which is set to pass through the House of Commons imminently, will require First Nations to publish their financial statements, including the pay and expenses of the chief and council.

Phyllis Sutherland is a band member from the Peguis First Nation in Manitoba, where the chief was found to be earning $220,000 tax free. She was on Parliament Hill in support of the bill and said people who have requested salary information in the past have been fired or forced to leave their communities.

Related

In due course, consolidated financial statements, including salaries and expenses, will be posted online and band members will be able to access them anonymously. That has the potential to set off a Native Spring of protests at unjustified remuneration packages.

Take the Blood Tribe in southern Alberta, which I highlight only because someone was kind enough to pass on the kind of information that is currently inaccessible to non-band members (and very hard to obtain, even for those who live on reserve).

The 10,000 member band received $75-million from Aboriginal Affairs, which constituted the bulk of its $121-million in revenues in 2011/12.

The Assembly of First Nations has opposed the legislation as being based on ‘misinformation’ and a lack of understanding. But the Blood Tribe example suggests the real reason is that the chiefs know they will be embarrassed by the truth and they fear the inevitable recriminations

Chief Charles Weasel Head received a combined salary and travel package of $131,715, which is dwarfed by the $193,445 taken home by council member Sheldon Day Chief. In total, the 13-member council and chief earned $1.7-million in salaries, honoraria and travel expenses last year — all of which was tax free. It appears from the names listed that many council members are related.

If the chief and council ran a tight ship, those amounts might not be excessive. But the audit makes clear that there are serious shortcomings in the governance of the band. “As a result of deficiencies in the Lands department there is a significant risk that all revenue may not be correctly deposited or reported in the records, or that cash may be misappropriated,” warned auditors Michael Zubach and Terryl Luhowy of Lethbridge-based MNP LLP.

They highlighted instances of fraud, millions of dollars in uncollected rents and numerous occasions where employees have taken cash advances without repaying the money.

Whether this level of what the whistleblower who forwarded the information labelled “buffoonery” is common practice, it’s hard to know.

The Assembly of First Nations has opposed the legislation as being based on “misinformation” and a lack of understanding. But the Blood Tribe example suggests the real reason is that the chiefs know they will be embarrassed by the truth and they fear the inevitable recriminations.

Passage of the financial transparency bill is hardly likely to improve relations between the government and the AFN. Shawn Atleo, the National Chief, said last month that First Nations reject Ottawa’s plans for new legislation on education — a cause for which he has previously been a vocal advocate.

In a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper he said momentum generated by January’s Crown-First Nation Gathering has been lost and the government’s legislative response is doing nothing to improve “deplorable’’ socio-economic conditions on reserves.

Mr. Atleo said solutions have to be “mutually developed with First Nations and not unilaterally developed and announced by federal officials.”

Yet what are the alternatives for government when the AFN defends the indefensible?

On the financial transparency bill and the pending education legislation, the AFN has proven itself an unreliable partner.